by Dr. William Pierce
Today let's begin by talking about individualism and
individualists. I'm using those words in a special sense. In this broadcast,
when I say "individualist" I mean a person who habitually fails to
consider or to give proper weight to the group context in which he belongs when
viewing the world, formulating ideas, and reaching decisions; and who in
evaluating other people fails to put them into the group context to which they
belong, instead focusing narrowly only on the individual at hand.
I also will use the word "individualist" to
designate a person who makes an ideology out of his individualism. In this
sense an individualist is a person who believes that it is good, moral,
admirable, proper, and so on, to disregard group contexts; and immoral,
unpatriotic, reprehensible, and wicked not to disregard them. Actually it's
impossible to avoid group contexts, and the ideological individualist himself
divides people into two groups: namely, individualists, who, like himself, are
good people; and "collectivists," who, like me, are bad people, akin
to communists.
I've spoken with you in earlier broadcasts about the
ideology of individualism, and today I want to focus more on some of the
practical implications of the attitude. I'll tell you first what prompted my
choice of this subject today: Two weeks ago I said some unkind things about
lawyers, judges, and our judicial system, and in response to that broadcast I
received a couple of indignant letters from lawyers who told me that I was both
unfair and inaccurate in my negative characterization of lawyers. Not all
lawyers are soulless, money-grubbing crooks, they told me. Some lawyers are
decent, honest, patriotic people, they told me. Some lawyers agree with me
about most things, and it is foolish to alienate them by calling all lawyers
crooks. I need their support, and I will lose it if I continue to insult them.
Well, I can't really disagree with that. I personally
know a few lawyers who aren't crooks, and I certainly do want to retain their
support. Looking at my broadcast of two weeks ago from an individualist
viewpoint, it was both unfair and inaccurate. The individualist would say that
I paint things with too broad a brush. I should say that some lawyers are
crooks, and then the individualist will agree with me. Of course, the essence
of my message two weeks ago was not that some lawyers are crooks; it was that
the judicial system is corrupt. The system designed by lawyers and staffed by
lawyers for the purpose of making and interpreting the laws is corrupt. The
fact that every lawyer is in some sense a part of that system does not mean
that every lawyer is corrupt. A few lawyers who are in the system are fighting
against the system. I didn't say that two weeks ago, because I wanted to keep
my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract my listeners from the
main thrust of the message with qualifications and quibbles. It's an important
message, and I wanted it to make the strongest possible impression on my
listeners. I deliberately paint with a broad stroke.
Here's another example of the way in which people
looking at things from an individualist viewpoint misunderstand my message. I
am often critical of the Christian churches, of their subservient collaboration
with the Jews, of their encouragement of miscegenation and their other racially
destructive policies. And some Christians who agree with my positions on the
Jews and on race take offense at my comments regarding the overall role of
Christianity in our society today, and they tell me, "Hey! I'm offended.
All Christians aren't race-mixers and collaborators with the Jews." And of
course, I understand that. I understand that there are many individual
Christians who are good people, Christians who don't run with the Jews, but
what I was talking about was the overall role of Christianity and the Christian
churches in our society, and that role today is destructive.
Another example: I often talk about the feminization
of our society and the feminization of our young men, and I make it quite clear
that I don't approve of these things. This offends some women, who take what I
say personally. An expression I used in one broadcast that offended several of
my women listeners enough for them to send me indignant letters of protest was
the phrase "college girls of both sexes." The implication was that
college girls are not to be taken more seriously than feminized college boys.
At another time I stated that permitting women to vote was a terrible mistake,
and again I received letters from women who indignantly told me that they vote
more responsibly than many men they know. Well, I'm sure they do, but I was
talking about the overall effect of women's votes, and that has been very
damaging to our society.
Of course, women as a rule take everything personally,
and so I explain individually to those who protest that I do take women
seriously, that I value and respect them, and that I love them -- but that I
also understand that despite all of the fascinating individual differences
among them, all of them are profoundly different from men.
When I receive protests from lawyers and from male
Christians, however, I see the individualist fallacy at work. Men should not
look at the world as individualists. They should understand that it is not only
natural and proper but necessary to judge other men according to the group of
which they are a part. Just as people have individual characteristics, they
also have collective characteristics, and to ignore the latter from fear of
being considered a racist or a sexist or an anti-Semite or a homophobe is the
worst sort of folly. When one is in a war one doesn't judge the soldiers on the
other side as individuals. One doesn't hold one's fire because the fellow in
the enemy's uniform who is charging with a rifle in his hands may really have
wanted to be a conscientious objector instead of a combat infantryman. If he's
in the enemy's uniform, one shoots at him.
We understand, of course, that not all Blacks are
muggers or gang-bangers or armed robbers or HIV-infected rapists, just as we
understand that not every Jew is a predator who is actively scheming to destroy
our people after he has sucked us dry. When I look at a Black I may see a
criminal or a welfare bum, or I may see an honest, hard-working person, but in
either case I see a Black, and I understand what his race is doing to my race
collectively. Even if an individual Black with whom I am dealing is friendly,
intelligent, and moral, I would be a fool to expect him to join me in a
campaign to put an end to what his race is doing to my race and my civilization
collectively.
I sometimes am obliged to deal with Jews: much more
often than with Blacks, in fact, because Jews collectively have arrogated to
themselves so many positions of control and influence in our society. And I am
able to distinguish among individual Jews. I see that many Jews with whom I
deal are tricky and deceitful, but there are some who are straightforward and
sincere, I believe. Many are really hateful, but occasionally I meet one who is
almost likable. Yet I never forget what Jews collectively, as a whole, are
doing and have done to my people collectively.
We must understand that we are in a planet-wide
race-war, and the survival of our race depends on our winning this war. We
won't win by wasting our time trying to figure out who the friendly Blacks are
and who the hostile ones are. We won't win by refusing to talk about what the
Jewish media bosses and the powerful Jewish organizations are doing to our
people from fear that we may be unjustly casting suspicion on Jews who are
simply minding their own business. We must deal with them collectively, and
when the crunch comes that's certainly the way they will deal with us.
In fact, that's pretty much the way they already deal
with us. When those gangs of Blacks were running wild through the Mardi Gras
crowd in Seattle a couple of weeks ago, savagely attacking White people, they
didn't try to figure out which Whites were racists and which ones were
diversity-loving, race-mixing liberals. Their cry was, "Let's get a
Whitey! We gonna kick some White ass tonight," and they attacked any White
target of opportunity they encountered.
The national media have successfully kept most of the
country from hearing about the Fat Tuesday race riot in Seattle, and on that
subject I have a few more thoughts to share with you. For one thing, I've been
able to gather a little more information about what happened that night. Not
only was there a series of vicious beatings and robberies of White men and
women by gangs of rampaging Blacks, there also was a series of sexual assaults.
The controlled media were even more eager to keep these covered up than the
beatings and robberies, but the news is leaking out -- in Seattle, at least.
It was very similar to what happened in New York's
Central Park last year, when a gang of Blacks and Puerto Ricans grabbed White
women who were walking in the park, ripped their clothes off, squeezed their
breasts, pushed fingers into their vaginas, and otherwise abused and humiliated
them. Just as in New York, in Seattle it was very definitely racial, often with
both Black males and Black females collaborating in the sexual abuse of White
women, and it was very definitely hostile: the same Black gangs who were
sexually abusing White women were viciously beating White women and White men.
When it happened in Central Park the news got out; primarily, I think, because a
couple of very loud Jewish feminists were among those abused. In Seattle it's
been covered up. But now it is coming out, after a fashion. I'll read just one
line from a March 12 article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer about
just one woman who was being held down and abused on Fat Tuesday while a news
reporter filmed the scene: "At one point there are 19 hands -- black,
Asian, Hispanic -- on her body."
Now I want to talk with you more about something I
touched on at the beginning of last week's broadcast, and that's the behavior
of the White people in Seattle's Mardi Gras crowd both before and during the
riot. I should begin by saying that it wasn't the way the local media and the
Seattle police claimed it was, with hooligans of both races fighting it out.
Whites did not attack Blacks. It was entirely Blacks attacking Whites. I have
had a chance now to study videotape footage of the riot, and the one-sided
nature of the racial attacks is quite clear.
What also is quite clear, however, is that many Whites
in the crowd were acting like Blacks, and virtually all of the Whites were
acting like lemmings. First, the Whites acting like Blacks: "wiggers"
they are generally called, for an obvious reason. There were many young White
men in the crowd wearing the backward baseball caps and baggy shorts that are
the trademark uniform of the wigger. Pathetic souls that they are, they have
been robbed of any natural sense of racial identity and racial community by
this utterly sick and depraved society in which we live. And I mean
deliberately robbed, with malice aforethought.
The Jewish media -- and the public schools -- have
played especially reprehensible roles in this destructive, genocidal work.
Everything that in healthier times helped give our young people a sense of
collective racial identity and racial pride has been repudiated in the schools.
The teaching of history and literature has become a joke. The Jews and the
feminists and the egalitarians have ripped the guts out of everything in the
schools that used to have White racial content. The multiculturalist ideologues
think this is wonderful because it prepares our children to be world citizens
in the New World Order of multiculturalism and diversity. For the
multiculturalists it's a religion. But the conservative Republicans who have
made an ideology out of individualism think it's fine too: at least, it's not
collectivism; it's not racism.
But having a sense of collective identity, a sense of
who we are and what group we belong to is what's natural. We evolved with a
need for this sense of collective identity. That's the way we survived in the
past. And so when the schools and the media rob the more lemming-like kids of
their sense of identity, they look for a replacement. And the schools -- and
especially the Jewish media -- have a ready-made replacement for them. They
find it on Sumner Redstone's MTV. They find it in Black History Month, where
they are told that everyone of worth, from the ancient Egyptian pharaohs to the
inventors of the helicopter and television, were Blacks. They find it in the
glorification by the media of Black basketball players and other Black sports
figures. They find it in the almost inescapable presence of Black music
promoted by the media. And they are made to understand that if they wear a
Confederate flag patch on their shirts they'll be expelled from school. But
it's OK to wear a Malcolm X T-shirt to commemorate a Black hero who wrote about
how much he wanted to kill Whites. And so we have wiggers imitating Blacks in
clothing styles, in speech patterns, in musical taste, and in behavior. That's
why when we look at the video footage of Seattle's Fat Tuesday riot we can see
young White men acting like Blacks, smashing windows, vandalizing cars,
sometimes fighting with normal Whites, pawing girls, and behaving in a
generally animalistic way.
Then there are the rest of the Whites, the
approximately normal Whites. Two things are notable about them. First, they
weren't expecting the Blacks to misbehave; they were completely surprised when
the Blacks began attacking them. And second, they didn't fight back. With the
notable exception of 20-year-old Kris Kime, who was murdered by the Blacks for
behaving the way a White man should behave, they didn't even try to protect
their own women. They just stood around and gaped at what was happening. To me
these two things are far more disturbing than what the Blacks did.
So why were the more-or-less normal Whites surprised
when the Blacks began behaving like Blacks? Why weren't they expecting that?
Haven't we had enough experience with Black behavior in America yet?
And, of course, the answer to that is that the normal
Whites are just as much lemmings as the wiggers. The wiggers just show it in a
more degenerate fashion. The wiggers are usually the lower-IQ lemmings -- the
lower-class, more impressionable lemmings. But the normal lemmings, most of
them less than 30 years old, have been conditioned all their lives, just like
the wiggers, by the Jewish media, by the schools, by the government, and by the
Christian churches to believe that Blacks are the same as Whites, except a
little darker. Really, most young Americans believe that, and they're surprised
every time reality conflicts with their belief. Every day I receive letters
from distressed young lemmings who have heard one of my broadcasts or visited
my Web site. They whine at me, "Why can't you see that we're all the same?
Don't you understand that the only difference between us and Blacks is skin
color? Don't you know that the only race is the human race? The scientists have
proved it!"
And really, they all sound pretty much alike. They
have had these lies drilled into their heads, and they parrot them back at me.
And some of these lemmings are reasonably bright, educated people. They really
believe that scientists have proved that there is no difference between Blacks
and Whites. And, I am sorry to say, some scientists have contributed to this
false belief, either because they are lemmings themselves and want to show that
they are Politically Correct, or because they hope to improve their chances of
getting another government research grant. Some of the scientists associated
with the human genome project, for example, have been quoted by the media as
saying that the mapping of the human genome supports the notion that racial
differences are insignificant. There is only a fraction of a percent difference
between the genomes for Whites and for Blacks they say. The genomes for the
various races are far more similar than they are different.
What they don't say, of course, is that there is only
a fraction of a per cent difference between the genome for White people and
that for chimpanzees. In fact, there is only a very small percentage difference
among the genomes for all the species of mammals. Most of the mammalian genome,
whether it is for a White person or a rat or a Negro or a dog, contains
instructions for how to synthesize hair and skin and nails and bone and milk
and teeth and nerve tissue and so on. Nearly all of the mammalian genome is taken
up with these instructions that are pretty much the same for all mammals. Only
a tiny fraction of the mammalian genome is different for each species. But that
tiny fraction of the mammalian genome that specifies whether the hair and skin
and bone and other tissues will become a White person or a rat or a Negro or a
dog is important. The differences, small though they may seem compared to the
similarities, are significant. Except to lemmings, of course, who really don't
get it.
White women baring their breasts in the presence of
Black males is an indication of just how lemming- like the normal Whites are.
Even back in Christian times, when the Mardi Gras festival was a much more
significant thing than it is today, there was a sexual flavor to much of the
revelry. But if a woman bared her breasts in a village Mardi Gras festival in
those times, 200 or 300 years ago, say, there were only Whites present, only
members of her own tribe, her own racial family, and she could reasonably
expect that she would not be sexually assaulted. There's an enormous difference
between that and exposing herself to non-Whites. But lemmings have been
conditioned not to understand that. And so they really were surprised when the
Blacks in the crowd began behaving like Blacks.
It is not only the lie that we are all the same, that
there are no significant differences between us and Blacks, that made the
Whites in Seattle such easy victims for the Blacks. It also is the abominable
doctrine of the ideological individualists that it is immoral to judge people
collectively, the racially destructive doctrine that it is immoral to deal with
rioting Blacks collectively. The individualists have preached that we should
look only at individuals committing crimes against other individuals, and we
should shut our eyes to the fact of Blacks committing crimes collectively
against Whites. The individualists have preached that for Whites even to notice
what Blacks collectively are doing to Whites collectively, whether in a Mardi
Gras festival or in our public schools or anywhere else is wicked; it is
racist. It is wicked to notice what the collective Black presence in our
society is doing to our society, to our civilization. We must judge each Black
individually; we must not organize a White posse and begin cracking Black
skulls when we see Backs collectively rampaging against our fellow Whites, the
way they did in Seattle.
These liberal doctrines are poisonous, racially
destructive doctrines, both the doctrine of equality and the doctrine of individualism.
Of course, there's more to it: there is the general softness, the generally
feminized condition, of young White males these days. And there was the
presence of the wiggers in the crowd, blurring the distinction between Whites
and Blacks. Altogether, as a race we are in pretty sorry shape. It's really
dangerous, and we need to do something about it. Get in touch with me, and I'll
tell you what you and I together can do.
No comments:
Post a Comment